Airgun hunting and equipment reviews

Jump to latest Follow Reply
I believe they generally loan the guns, as opposed to giving them away for free. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong.) I don't mean to imply a lack of honesty or integrity on the part of any reviewer, but the practice does suggest the possibility of bias on the part of the tester, and bad air rifle reviews are few and far between.
 
Upvote 0
Took a while for that 💡to come on! I have more respect for creators that share where the products came from, than those that keep it a secret.

Daystate advertises some type of "loaner" program on Instagram, not sure how you qualify. 

1574273348_10490643765dd58144578982.02003955_Screen Shot 2019-11-20 at 12.08.19 PM.png
 
 
Upvote 0
Also I think they are getting their travel expenses paid to travel to all the big name shoots and events. Look at the mansions they stay in at RMAC and EBR. That is why some of the more popular shooters didn’t show at EBR. The manufacturer didn’t want to pay their way I’m guessing. I am not faulting them at all. They were in the right place at the right time in u tube. I say good for them plus I love their videos and those take a lot of work. Just saying. 
 
Upvote 0
Influencers, companies can make tons of money by sending a product on loan or gratis to a youtube influencer and save huge in marketing versus what one will say about their products. Our youtube channel for business we own is monetized we dont make a ton of money from it but we are periodically given a product for review but we always correspond that our review will be honest the good the bad and what we may like to see.
 
Upvote 0
Personally I’m not sure that it matters a lot if a brand influencer receives benefits from reviewing any particular airgun or product. For me all a review does is to peek my interest so I then go and do further research on the particular product/item before making up my mind on whether to actually try it out before buying

There are so many reviews on forums and the likes of You Tube with both good and not so good opinions on airguns that at times I find it quite confusing as to what is really true.
 
Upvote 0
I hope Steve pitches in on this but there are sponsored Review Channels and Private Channels, The biggest issue right now I think is that You Tube has made it almost impossible for any Reviewer to do these kind of shows on Air Guns or any "weapon" with out being sponsored. Since it has placed limits or barring them from being able to monetize the channel. 

People Like Steve has found a way to give honest reviews while still keeping his sponsors, The best way to tell if the Reviewer is a good honest one that will tell you the facts is to look at many of his videos see how many negative remarks are made about an item. It is not going to be in words like this thing totally sucks but it will be a tactful there are issues that could be improved on or that ( Like the Gauntlet in Steve's Review) "Hey this is a budget gun so some rough edges can be expected" It takes a very diplomatic approach to be able to be true to oneself and his listeners while not burning sponsor bridges. 
 
Upvote 0
Maybe I'm a little slow, but I didn't know that when a YouTube channels shows "in association with", or puts a dealer or manufacturer logo on their video that they are being provided (free loaner) rifles or equipment to use in that video. And that there is no expectation to actually say so as part of or in the video. Things that make you go hmmm... ;)
Click to expand...

I would assume in association with means that. They are associates, another way of saying supported by. Maybe im alone.
 
Upvote 0
All the reviews I do are for the most part paid for by the distributor. Many of my videos are a large overhead as far as my time, some take weeks to do. Editing, gas and that sort of thing are a large expense as part of production cost. I sometimes do reviews or videos out of pocket but for the most part this is a full time career for me. I make it very clear before and after reviewing the gun that said company has sponsored me to get out into the field with said gun. The ASP program is not intended for guys like me but for those regular Joe's that just like to compete and share their experiences on social media and forums. Anyone is free to participate in this program by filling out the form on the website. I have thankfully been able to hand pick many of the guns I review, most all are guns I would like to own, certain guns I choose not to shoot. The last thing I want to do is go out into the field and hunt with a gun I absolutely hate. Lol My experience is that every gun has its flaws, my job is to find the good and the bad and share them in the most tasteful way possible. My opinions cannot be bought, simply not worth ruining my reputation to make a buck. I'm super blessed to do what I love. 
 
Upvote 0
I try not to buy anything based solely on a YT vid. YT serves two purposes to me, educational (how to) and reviews that are but one tiny piece of a much larger puzzle that must be corroborated by actual unpaid users. Just like the hunting shows on TV and magazines which are for the most part nothing but infomercials that one is paying to watch.
 
Upvote 0
If its obvious that the equipment is being provided for review, like AEAC, then fine. We all know that, and Steve does a great job reviewing equipment, plus has a way of being tactful when expectations aren't met. But its hard, especially on some "Hunting" videos to discern whether or not the guns are provided free or not, and whether it be a loaner or gift.

What I'm wondering is that aside from posts on AGN, why don't we really see any reviews that have a negative slant? What I "think" happens is when a product is given for review, and the review knows that the product isn't really that great, or is downright bad, he doesn't do the video vice doing a negative one. Maybe I'm wrong but certainly not every product is great? There are certainly some relatively popular guns out there that are substandard, or have issues that need upgrade or correction prior to being useable. Its just that we almost never hear a bout them.

We've all read about the Impact/Crown regulators creeping, but FX in its usual style took the negative feedback and dramatically improved the stock reg. That's an example of negative feedback being beneficial. And also of a company willing to accept constructive criticism and do something about it. Some manufacturers aren't like that...
 
Upvote 0
Let’s take this the next step- how many guns being reviewed are “prepped” by the manufacturer, special for the review? Tuned and pre tweaked for the utmost accuracy, shot count(never any signs of reg creep on the first couple shots, lol) and velocity, and in the end, the reviewer says “this is straight out of the box, folks”.
Click to expand...

That’s a good point. However, there are various degrees of prep that are done at some (not all) dealers. AoA always sends a 20 yard test target and Chrony results shot with the intended pellet as part of their sale. Georgia Airguns goes a couple of steps further by shooting eight 40 yard 5 shot test targets with various pellets, cleaning/polishing the barrel, and adjusting the trigger prior to shipping, plus he includes a couple extra magazines and a container of orings. I’m not sure if any dealer just sends the gun out without at least airing it up and shooting some pellets. Although I’m not sure since I’ve only bought one new gun, all the rest were bought used…
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu